Sybase NNTP forums - End Of Life (EOL)

The NNTP forums from Sybase - forums.sybase.com - are now closed.

All new questions should be directed to the appropriate forum at the SAP Community Network (SCN).

Individual products have links to the respective forums on SCN, or you can go to SCN and search for your product in the search box (upper right corner) to find your specific developer center.

Object binding in multi-tempdb server

2 posts in Product Futures Discussion Last posting was on 2006-05-11 03:13:09.0Z
Lindsey White <whitelw Posted on 2006-05-02 12:57:17.0Z
From: Lindsey White <whitelw@*NO_SPAM*michigan.gov>
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en]C-CCK-MCD (Windows NT 5.0; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
Newsgroups: sybase.public.ase.product_futures_discussion
Subject: Object binding in multi-tempdb server
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
NNTP-Posting-Host: 204.22.154.161
X-Original-NNTP-Posting-Host: 204.22.154.161
Message-ID: <4457572d$1@forums-1-dub>
Date: 2 May 2006 05:57:17 -0700
X-Trace: forums-1-dub 1146574637 204.22.154.161 (2 May 2006 05:57:17 -0700)
X-Original-Trace: 2 May 2006 05:57:17 -0700, 204.22.154.161
Lines: 19
Path: forums-1-dub!not-for-mail
Xref: forums-1-dub sybase.public.ase.product_futures_discussion:1808
Article PK: 96739

Hi Gang!

I would like to know if there is a feature request ( or an already
existing capability that I am missing in the manuals) to be able to bind
a specific object to a specific temporary database in a multiple
temporary database installation. I would like to bind a slow procedure
(30 minute open transaction) to it's own temporary database to reduce
the chance of the log filling up. I realize that we could just increase
the size of the log, but it is on a tempfs device and memory is a
premium. here. The proc doesn't use much space itself, it is the fact
that the transaction is open for so long. I know.... That proc should
be broken into smaller transactions, but the development staff is
reluctant to fix something that they deem to be un-broken.

thanks for the input...

Lindsey


Sherlock, Kevin Posted on 2006-05-11 03:13:09.0Z
From: "Sherlock, Kevin" <ksherlock@saionline.com>
Newsgroups: sybase.public.ase.product_futures_discussion
References: <4457572d$1@forums-1-dub>
Subject: Re: Object binding in multi-tempdb server
Lines: 28
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2869
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869
X-RFC2646: Format=Flowed; Original
X-Original-NNTP-Posting-Host: 204.193.195.29
Message-ID: <4462abae$1@forums-2-dub>
X-Original-Trace: 10 May 2006 20:12:46 -0700, 204.193.195.29
X-Original-NNTP-Posting-Host: forums-2-dub.sybase.com
X-Original-Trace: 10 May 2006 20:12:48 -0800, forums-2-dub.sybase.com
NNTP-Posting-Host: forums-master.sybase.com
X-Original-NNTP-Posting-Host: forums-master.sybase.com
Date: 10 May 2006 20:13:09 -0700
X-Trace: forums-1-dub 1147317189 10.22.108.75 (10 May 2006 20:13:09 -0700)
X-Original-Trace: 10 May 2006 20:13:09 -0700, forums-master.sybase.com
X-Authenticated-User: ngsysop
Path: forums-1-dub!not-for-mail
Xref: forums-1-dub sybase.public.ase.product_futures_discussion:1813
Article PK: 96744

You might want to look through the ISUG feature request list and see for
yourself.

http://www.isug.com

"Lindsey White" <whitelw@*NO_SPAM*michigan.gov> wrote in message
news:4457572d$1@forums-1-dub...
> Hi Gang!
>
> I would like to know if there is a feature request ( or an already
> existing capability that I am missing in the manuals) to be able to bind
> a specific object to a specific temporary database in a multiple
> temporary database installation. I would like to bind a slow procedure
> (30 minute open transaction) to it's own temporary database to reduce
> the chance of the log filling up. I realize that we could just increase
> the size of the log, but it is on a tempfs device and memory is a
> premium. here. The proc doesn't use much space itself, it is the fact
> that the transaction is open for so long. I know.... That proc should
> be broken into smaller transactions, but the development staff is
> reluctant to fix something that they deem to be un-broken.
>
> thanks for the input...
>
> Lindsey
>
>